DOCSLIB.ORG

Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility INCHING AWAY FROM ARMAGEDDON: DESTROYING THE U.S. CHEMICAL WEAPONS STOCKPILE April 2004 By Claudine McCarthy and Julie Fischer, Ph.D. With the assistance of Yun Jung Choi, Alexis Pierce and Gina Ganey The Henry L. Stimson Center Introduction i Copyright © 2004 The Henry L. Stimson Center All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission in writing from The Henry L. Stimson Center. Cover design by Design Army. The Henry L. Stimson Center 11 Dupont Circle, NW 9th Floor Washington, DC 20036 phone 202.223.5956 fax 202.238.9604 www.stimson.org ii The Henry L. Stimson Center Introduction INTRODUCTION On 3 September 2003, the Department of Defense issued a press release noting that the United States (US) would be unable to meet the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) deadline for the destruction of 45 percent of its chemical weapons stockpile by 27 April 2004.1 This announcement also indirectly confirmed that the United States will be unable to meet the CWC’s deadline for destroying its entire stockpile by 27 April 2007. The treaty allows for a five-year extension of this final deadline, which the United States will likely need to request as that date draws closer. Chemical weapons destruction is the exception to the old adage that it is easier to destroy than to create. While some of the toxic agents are stored in bulk containers that must be emptied, their contents neutralized, and the contaminated containers destroyed, more remain in weaponized form (inside rockets, bombs, landmines, and other armaments) in storage igloos at six sites in the US. Maintaining safety, therefore, must be the priority for the destruction process. Assuring citizens of the communities near to the facilities that every effort is being made to minimize risks to their safety and working with these communities to develop sound emergency response plans are connected but separate tasks. Indeed, many citizens, alarmed by the possible damage an accidental release during destruction could cause to their communities, have mounted extensive efforts to address their concerns. Lawsuits over safety measures delayed the operational testing of the Anniston, Alabama facility, while investigation of an accidental leak that exposed a worker to an agent at Tooele, Utah caused its facility to cease operation for several months. Regulatory changes, contractor problems, security concerns, and addressing the deteriorating condition of some parts of the stockpile are other reasons that have been cited for the ongoing delays and increased costs that have plagued US chemical destruction efforts. The purpose of this guide is to serve as a basic reference to the US chemical demilitarization program. The guide does not seek to pass judgment on the program, nor on those who oppose the program’s decisions. 1 The United States requested, and received in October 2003, a three-year extension of this intermediate deadline via mechanisms provided within the CWC. The Henry L. Stimson Center Introduction iii All of the information contained within this document was gathered from open sources and collated in this volume with tabbed divisions for easy access to the topic areas. The data was current as of April 2004. Chemical and Biological Weapons Nonproliferation Project research assistants Katherine Powers and Yun Jung Choi and interns Alexis Pierce and Gina Ganey pulled together the data found herein, an often confusing and difficult task. In the long term, ridding the United States of this deadly arsenal will improve the security of all Americans. Understanding the complexity of the task and continuing to develop and support policies that move this process forward safely in the short term is of the utmost importance in reaching that goal. Claudine McCarthy Editor April 30, 2004 iv The Henry L. Stimson Center Introduction INCHING AWAY FROM ARMAGEDDON: DESTROYING THE U.S. CHEMICAL WEAPONS STOCKPILE April 2004 Acronyms Destruction Sites Chemical Agents Munitions and Storage Destruction Techniques Program Time and Cost Overruns Key Organizations/Agencies Timeline of Legislation and Oversight Timeline of Chemical Leaks at Destruction Sites Glossary Links Sources The Henry L. Stimson Center Acronyms v vi The Henry L. Stimson Center ACRONYMS ABCDF Aberdeen Chemical Agent Disposal Facility ACADF Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility ACWA Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives ACWAP Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment Program APG Aberdeen Proving Ground ATAP Alternative Technologies and Approaches Project CAC Citizens Advisory Commission CBDCOM Army Chemical and Biological Defense Command CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CMA Chemical Materials Agency CSDP Chemical Stockpile Disposal Project CSEPP Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program CWC Chemical Weapons Convention DTRA Defense Threat Reduction Agency EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GB sarin H, HD, HT sulfur mustard JACADS Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System NaOH sodium hydroxide NECDF Newport Chemical Agent Disposal Facility NSCMP Non-Stockpile Chemical Material Project PBCSF Pine Bluff Chemical Storage Facility PMECW Program Manager for Elimination of Chemical Weapons PUCD Pueblo Chemical Depot SCWO super critical water oxidation TOCDF Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility UMCDF Umatilla Chemical Agent Disposal Facility The Henry L. Stimson Center Acronyms vii viii The Henry L. Stimson Center Figure: US Chemical Weapons Storage/Destruction Sites The Henry L. Stimson Center Destruction Sites 1 ABERDEEN CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITY (ABCDF) Aberdeen/Edgewood, Maryland When the US chemical demilitarization effort began, Aberdeen housed 5 percent of the nation’s original stockpile – 1,625 tons of chemical agent. As of April 2004, 7% of the agent stockpile and 7% of the munitions stockpile at the Aberdeen facility had been neutralized. Agent Blister agent sulfur mustard stored in ton containers Site Location and Specifics • Southeast of Edgewood, MD; near the City of Aberdeen (pop. 13,000) • In Harford County (pop. 227,713) • 2,700 families live on-site Employment Statistics • Aberdeen Proving Ground employs 6,699 civilians and 4,785 military personnel∗ • Subcontractor Battelle Memorial Institute employs 210 local civilians Agent Destruction Accelerated Neutralization Contractors/Subcontractors • A $306 million contract was awarded to Bechtel National, Inc. in 1998 • Subcontractors include: Battelle Memorial Institute Innovative Emergency Management Earth Tech Horne Engineering EA Engineering Upper Chesapeake Medical Services General Physics Corporation UXB Waste Management ∗ Numbers are not available for demilitarization facilities alone. The Henry L. Stimson Center Destruction Sites 3 Groups/Organizations Involved with Site Local APG Superful Citizens’ Coalition Aberdeen, Abingdon, Baltimore, Earleville, Elkton, and North East Counties State Harford County Harford County Division of Environmental Affairs Harford County Health Department Bureau of Environmental Health Maryland Citizens’ Advisory Commissions Milestones/Important Developments • April 2003: Destruction began almost two years ahead of original schedule • January 2004: Over 78 tons of agent has been destroyed Projected Schedule • Spring 2004: Complete agent neutralization, 18 months ahead of original schedule • Winter 2004: Finish cleaning containers • Summer 2005: Close site, one to two years ahead of original schedule Political Representatives • US Representative C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger III (D - 2nd District) • US Senators Barbara Mikulski (D) and Paul Sarbanes (D) • Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich • Maryland State Senator Nancy Jacobs (34th District) • Maryland State House Delegates Charles Boutin (34th District) and Mary-Dulany James th (34 District) Contact Information Edgewood Chemical Stockpile Outreach Office tel. 410-676-6800 fax. 410-676-2483 Aberdeen Chemical Agent Disposal Facility tel. 410-436-5253 fax. 410-436-9646 4 The Henry L. Stimson Center Destruction Sites ANNISTON CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL FACILITY (ACADF) Anniston, Alabama When the US chemical demilitarization effort began, Anniston housed 7 percent of the nation’s original stockpile – 2,254 tons of chemical agent. As of April 2004, 5% of the agent stockpile and 3% of the munitions stockpile at the Anniston facility had been destroyed. Agent • Nerve agents sarin and VX stored in cartridges, projectiles, rockets and mines • Blister agent sulfur mustard stored in cartridges, projectiles and ton containers Site Location and Specifics • 8 miles west of Anniston (pop. 23, 332) • In Calhoun County (pop. 112,171) Employment Statistics • Anniston Army Depot as a whole employs 3,804 people∗ • Affiliated groups o Westinghouse Electric Corporation employs 503 people o Werner Co. (aluminum extrusions) employs 650 people o General Dynamics employs 223 people Agent Destruction Technique Incineration Contractors/Subcontractors • $213.8 million contract awarded to Westinghouse Electric Corporation in 1996, now part of the Washington Demilitarization Company • Current contract value is approximately $1.3 billion • Subcontractors include: Battelle Memorial Institute Morrison Knudsen General Physics Corporation Bechtel National, Inc., Innovative Emergency Management Becon Construction Company ∗ Numbers not available for demilitarization facility. The Henry L. Stimson Center Destruction Sites 5 Groups/Organizations Involved with the Site Local Coosa River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The History of the Chemical Weapons Movement
    Chemical Weapons Movement History Compilation William R. Brankowitz 27 April 1987 . Office of the Program Manager for Chemical Munitions (Demilitarization and Binary) (Provisional) Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5401 I Chemical Weapons Movement History CcX@latiOn Table of Contents Page Executive Surnnaq 1 How To Use The Cmpilation 2 Introduction 6 Location Key 15 Incident Summarization Sheets 18 Compilation of Moves Pages w Year 1946 11 pages 1947 1 page 1948 2 pages 1949 4 pages 1950 3 pages 1951 2 pages 1952 2 pages 1953 3 pages 1954 3 pages 1955 1 w-e 1956 2 pages 1957 2 pages 1958 3 pages 1959 1 page 1960 1 Page 1961 1 page 1962 2 pages 1963 3 pages 1964 4 pages . 1965 5 pages 1966 4 pages 1967 6 pages 1968 a pages 1969 1 Page 1970-77 2 pages SE'EONI 3 pages SmON II 2 pages 1981-86 3 pages Reccrmendations and Conclusioris 25 f-4 i 4' References Executive Summary The production of a compilation of movement operations provides a base of data which can be used or interpreted in many ways. Some are favorable to the Army, and some are not. However, the Army wishes to show that (1) it has moved large quantities of chemical weapons over many years with relatively few problems and that (2) the Army has learned lessons from the problems which is has encountered. The Army also shows in this study that although there have been some problems associated with the movement of chemical weapons, there has never been a chemical agent fatality associated with such a move.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program
    SAFE TODAY, SAFER TOMORROW CSEPP CHEMICAL STOCKPILE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM CHEMICAL STOCKPILE CHEMICAL STOCKPILE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM WHAT IS CSEPP? The Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness departments and agencies, two States, local Program (CSEPP) works closely with the communities governments, volunteer organizations, the private around the Nation’s two remaining chemical weapons sector and the public under a single goal – enhancing storage and disposal sites in Kentucky and Colorado, emergency preparedness. This partnership has with the mission to “enhance existing local, installation, improved the ability to protect the public by upgrading tribal, state and federal capabilities to protect the emergency plans and providing chemical accident health and safety of the public, work force and response equipment and warning systems. environment from the effects of a chemical accident Aside from chemical stockpile response, communities or incident involving the U.S. Army chemical stockpile” may face emergencies related to weather, earthquakes, (CSEPP Strategic Plan, July 2019). floods, fires, hazardous material spills or releases, A whole community partnership created in 1988, and transportation and industrial accidents. The CSEPP unites the U.S. Army, Federal Emergency capabilities augmented by CSEPP enable communities Management Agency (FEMA), other Federal to better respond to all hazards. 1 SAFE TODAY, SAFER TOMORROW CHEMICAL STOCKPILE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM ENHANCING EMERGENCY SAFER BECAUSE OF CSEPP PREPAREDNESS The Department of Defense is CSEPP was created in 1988 to The stockpiles In Colorado and CSEPP is committed to maintaining its preparedness CSEPP officials work together to prepare the whole destroying chemical weapons at enhance emergency response Kentucky are safely stored by the mission until the entire chemical stockpile is destroyed community.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chemical Weapons Conventions at 1
    Rudderless: The Chemical Weapons Convention At 1 ½ Amy E. Smithson Report No. 25 September 1998 Copyright© 1998 11 Dupont Circle, NW Ninth Floor Washington, DC 20036 phone 202.223.5956 fax 202.238.9604 http://www.stimson.org email [email protected] Rudderless: The Chemical Weapons Convention At 1 1/2 Amy E. Smithson INTRODUCTION On the 29th of April 1997, the majority of the world’s nations joined to activate an arms control and nonproliferation accord that will gradually compel the elimination of one of the most abhorred classes of weapons of all times. Previously, the international community had fallen short of the mark in efforts to try to abolish poison gas, despite the opprobrium following its widespread use in World War I.1 The new Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) extends the no use-prohibitions of the 1925 Geneva Protocol2 to outlaw the development, acquisition, production, transfer, and stockpiling of chemical weapons as well. The CWC requires the destruction of chemical weapons production facilities and arsenals over a ten-year period, and countries will witness the shrinking numbers of poison gas factories and munitions. A less tangible function of the CWC, but one that may turn out to be equally valued over the long term is that the CWC will help redefine how states assure their national security. The CWC requires nations to declare activities that were previously considered state secrets and private business information. The treaty authorizes routine and challenge inspections to monitor compliance with its prohibitions. Instead of building large caches of arms, the CWC’s verification processes give governments reason to be confident that managed transparency—a limited waiver of state sovereignty—can enhance national and international security.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Munitions Igloos for the Container Storage of Wastes Generated from the Maintenance of the Chemical Munitions Stockpile Attachment D.2
    Tooele Army Depot - South Hazardous Wae Storage Permit Permit Attachment 12 - Container Management Modification Date: March 3. 1994 Chemical Munitions Igloos for the Container Storage of Wastes Generated from the Maintenance of the Chemical Munitions Stockpile Attachment D.2. Containers with Free Liquids The stockpile of chemical munitions stored at TEAD(S) (which included the M-55 rockets before they were declarbed obsolete, and became a hazardous waste) requires continual maintenance. These maintenance activities generate wastes, examples of which are: The valves and plugs used on ton containers used to store bulk chemical agent are changed out on a periodic basis, the valves and plugs that are removed are decontaminated, containerized, and managed as a hazardous waste. Wastes of this type would typically carry waste numbers F999 and/or P999, in addition to other waste numbers where applicable. Discarded protective clothing (including suites, boots, gloves, canister to personnel breathing apparatus, etc.) is containerized and managed as a hazardous waste. Certain types of impregnated carbon have been found to contain chromium and silver in leachable quantities exceeding the TCLP criteria for hazardous waste. In such cases, EPA Waste Numbers D007 and DOll would be assigned to these wastes in addition to any other applicable hazardous waste numbers. Any indoor area where chemical agents, or agent filled munitions are stored has the potential to be ventilated. The air removed from the area passes through a bed of activated carbon before being released to the atmosphere. When the activated charcoal is changed out, the spent' carbon is containerized, and managed as a hazardous waste.
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama Department of Environmental Management
    ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT NOTICE OF PROPOSED RENEWAL OF THE HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY PERMIT UNDER THE ALABAMA HAZARDOUS WASTES MANAGEMENT AND MINIMIZATION ACT (AHWMMA) AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS PUBLIC NOTICE – 421 CALHOUN COUNTY Anniston Army Depot of Anniston, Alabama submitted to ADEM an application for renewal of its Hazardous Waste Facility permit for the 3 ANMC Conventional Waste Munitions Storage Igloos, 3 ANAD Industrial Waste Storage Buildings ,1 Roll-off Storage Building, 1 Open Burning Unit, 1 Open Detonation Unit, 1 Static Detonation Chamber (SDC), 3 SDC Service Magazines, 34 SDC Conventional Waste Munitions Storage Igloos, 1 Thermal Treatment Closed Disposal Process (TTCDP), 1 Energetic Treatment Unit (Flash Furnace), and 3 Rocket Motor Fire Units which are used to manage hazardous waste at its facility (EPA I.D. Number AL3 210 020 027 located at 7 Frankford Avenue, Anniston, Alabama 36201. The Department has determined the facility’s renewal application to be complete and has prepared a draft permit in accordance with State regulations. Anniston Army Depot operates a facility that treats and stores hazardous waste. The United States Department of the Army, Anniston Army Depot (Facility Owner, Facility Co-Permittee, Facility Operator); the United States Department of the Army, Anniston Munitions Center (Facility Co-Permittee, Facility Co- Operator (ANMC operations)); the United States Department of the Army, Anniston Field Office (AFO) (Facility Co-Permittee, Facility Co-Operator (Static Detonation Chamber (SDC) Site); and Washington Demilitarization Company LLC (Facility Co-Permittee, Facility Co-Operator (SDC site)) are the operators of the hazardous waste storage and treatment facility. The proposed permit renewal incorporates updates to the previous permit to reflect changes made to Part I thought IX of the AHWMMA permit.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications
    Order Code RL31861 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications Updated September 9, 2003 Dana A. Shea Analyst in Science and Technology Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications Summary Terrorist use of chemical agents has been a noted concern, highlighted after the Tokyo Sarin gas attacks of 1995. The events of September 11, 2001, increased Congressional attention towards reducing the vulnerability of the United States to such attacks. High-threat chemical agents, which include chemical weapons and some toxic industrial chemicals, are normally organized by military planners into four groups: nerve agents, blister agents, choking agents, and blood agents. While the relative military threat posed by the various chemical types has varied over time, use of these chemicals against civilian targets is viewed as a low probability, high consequence event. High-threat chemical agents, depending on the type of agent used, cause a variety of symptoms in their victims. Some cause death by interfering with the nervous system. Some inhibit breathing and lead to asphyxiation. Others have caustic effects on contact. As a result, chemical attack treatment may be complicated by the need to identify at least the type of chemical used. Differences in treatment protocols for the various high-threat agents may also strain the resources of the public health system, especially in the case of mass casualties. Additionally, chemical agents trapped on the body or clothes of victims may place first responders and medical professionals at risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Status Report on the Destruction of the United States Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions for Fiscal Year 2019
    Annual Status Report on the Destruction of the United States Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions for Fiscal Year 2019 September 30, 2019 The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $740 for the 2019 Fiscal Year. This includes $0 in expenses and $740 in DoD labor. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 II. Mission .................................................................................................................................1 III. Organization .........................................................................................................................1 IV. Current Status of U.S. Chemical Weapons Destruction ......................................................2 A. Site-by-Site Description of Chemical Weapons Stockpile Destruction……………….2 B. Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program……………………………..….3 V. Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program ......................................................5 VI. Funding Execution ...............................................................................................................7 VII. Safety Status of Chemical Weapons Stockpile Storage .......................................................8 APPENDICES A. Abbreviations and Symbols B. Program Disbursements C. Summary Occurrences of Leaking Chemical Munitions i I. Introduction The Department of Defense (DoD) is submitting
    [Show full text]
  • Desind Finding
    NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE ARCHIVES Herbert Stephen Desind Collection Accession No. 1997-0014 NASM 9A00657 National Air and Space Museum Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC Brian D. Nicklas © Smithsonian Institution, 2003 NASM Archives Desind Collection 1997-0014 Herbert Stephen Desind Collection 109 Cubic Feet, 305 Boxes Biographical Note Herbert Stephen Desind was a Washington, DC area native born on January 15, 1945, raised in Silver Spring, Maryland and educated at the University of Maryland. He obtained his BA degree in Communications at Maryland in 1967, and began working in the local public schools as a science teacher. At the time of his death, in October 1992, he was a high school teacher and a freelance writer/lecturer on spaceflight. Desind also was an avid model rocketeer, specializing in using the Estes Cineroc, a model rocket with an 8mm movie camera mounted in the nose. To many members of the National Association of Rocketry (NAR), he was known as “Mr. Cineroc.” His extensive requests worldwide for information and photographs of rocketry programs even led to a visit from FBI agents who asked him about the nature of his activities. Mr. Desind used the collection to support his writings in NAR publications, and his building scale model rockets for NAR competitions. Desind also used the material in the classroom, and in promoting model rocket clubs to foster an interest in spaceflight among his students. Desind entered the NASA Teacher in Space program in 1985, but it is not clear how far along his submission rose in the selection process. He was not a semi-finalist, although he had a strong application.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Csepp Community Recovery Plan
    COLORADO CSEPP COMMUNITY RECOVERY PLAN June 2016 1 Executive Summary Purpose The purpose of the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP) Recovery Plan is to outline the coordination and support activities that occur in the recovery phase following a chemical event at Pueblo Chemical Depot (PCD). The term “recovery” includes measures to assess the hazard and perform other urgent tasks in the area affected by the emergency; a controlled process for reentry, restoration, and remediation; and provision of services to persons, businesses and other organizations affected by the emergency. The primary purpose of recovery activities is to protect public health and safety while returning the community to normal or near normal conditions. The Colorado CSEPP Team has been an active participant in the evolution of CSEPP recovery planning and preparedness, beginning April 15, 1992 when it identified the programmatic need for resolution of recovery issues during a Table Top Exercise (TTX) conducted in Pueblo. Between January 2014 and August 2015, a series of seminars and tabletop exercises had been conducted focusing on different aspects of the plan with the goal of validating its contents. Additional stakeholders were brought into the processes that were not included when the original plan was written. Changes in regulatory requirements were also updated. This was accomplished as the first set of chemical munitions was being destroyed. Management of such an incident will conform to the principles of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as required by Colorado Executive Order D 011 04, dated December 6, 2004 and the PCD and / or PCAPP Contingency Plan pursuant to the facility permit or interim status plans and the Colorado Hazardous Waste Regulations, 6 CCR 1007-3, Section 264.1(g)(8)(iii).
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Disposal of Chemical Weapons in the Ocean: Background and Issues for Congress
    Order Code RL33432 U.S. Disposal of Chemical Weapons in the Ocean: Background and Issues for Congress Updated January 3, 2007 David M. Bearden Analyst in Environmental Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division U.S. Disposal of Chemical Weapons in the Ocean: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The U.S. Armed Forces disposed of chemical weapons in the ocean from World War I through 1970. At that time, it was thought that the vastness of ocean waters would absorb chemical agents that may leak from these weapons. However, public concerns about human health and environmental risks, and the economic effects of potential damage to marine resources, led to a statutory prohibition on the disposal of chemical weapons in the ocean in 1972. For many years, there was little attention to weapons that had been dumped offshore prior to this prohibition. However, the U.S. Army completed a report in 2001 indicating that the past disposal of chemical weapons in the ocean had been more common and widespread geographically than previously acknowledged. The Army cataloged 74 instances of disposal through 1970, including 32 instances off U.S. shores and 42 instances off foreign shores. The disclosure of these records has renewed public concern about lingering risks from chemical weapons still in the ocean today. The risk of exposure to chemical weapons dumped in the ocean depends on many factors, such as the extent to which chemical agents may have leaked into seawater and been diluted or degraded over time. Public health advocates have questioned whether contaminated seawater may contribute to certain symptoms among coastal populations, and environmental advocates have questioned whether leaked chemical agents may have affected fish stocks and other marine life.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Agents July 2010
    Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste FACT SHEET Chemical Agents July 2010 Chemical agents at Deseret quantities of GB. mustard but is a more potent Chemical Depot are contained in GA (tabun) is a non-persistent systemic poison. Lewisite is likely rockets, land mines, mortars, nerve agent that is about half as carcinogenic. The body is unable to artillery projectiles and cartridges, toxic as GB. Relatively small detoxify Lewisite but an antidote bombs, spray tanks, and ton amounts of GA are stored in Utah. has been developed. Relatively containers. Dugway Proving VX is a persistent nerve agent. VX small amounts of Lewisite are Ground also stores chemical is easily absorbed through the skin stored in Utah. munitions. Two types of chemical or ingested as a liquid. VX can be Hazardous Waste agents that are stored in Utah are absorbed through the respiratory Chemical agents and the waste nerve agents and blister agents. tract as a vapor or aerosol. The resulting from treating or testing the Deseret Chemical Depot stockpile agents are regulated as hazardous NERVE AGENTS contains substantial quantities of waste. Nerve agents are organophosphates VX. that cause a blocking of the BLISTER AGENTS Additional Information cholinesterase enzymes. When Blister agents were named for their If you would like more detailed acetyl cholinesterase is blocked, effect on skin and other tissues. information or have questions acetylcholine builds-up within the The blister agents are vesicants that please contact: nervous system. This build-up may are severe irritants to tissue and can DEQ / DSHW cause an over-stimulation of be deadly at high concentrations.
    [Show full text]
  • Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
    FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2008/09 BUDGET ESTIMATES February 2007 CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT Chemical Demilitarization The Chemical Demilitarization Program destroys the U.S. stockpile of chemical weapons. The United States has an obligation to destroy all such weapons under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which was entered into in 1997. PERFORMING Adequate • After destroying only 136 tons in 2003 the program has destroyed over 4,473 tons since, and 11,506 tons overall. All CWC treaty milestones have been met to date, and the program is on track to achieve the CWC 45% destruction milestone by December 2007 including destroying binary chemicals and the destruction of former production facilities by April 2007. • The program has an excellent safety record. Nonetheless, community concerns have delayed construction of plants. This has resulted in increased costs and will delay the destruction of the chemical stockpile. • The program has developed annual destruction goals to guide its progress toward destroying the entire U.S. chemical weapons stockpile as close as practicable to the CWC 100% destruction deadline of April 2012. We are taking the following actions to improve the performance of the program: • Expediting disposal of secondary waste by assessing alternative technologies or using off-site treatment to reduce cost, shorten schedules, make better use of equipment, and improve processing. • Maintaining an Integrated Risk Management Program that stresses early risk identification, mitigation planning, and execution to minimize impacts on cost, schedule, performance, and safety. • Implementing and tracking performance measures such as Annual Cost Index, Annual Schedule Index, and Cost per Ton Index to ensure meeting or exceeding annual destruction goals.
    [Show full text]